A Long Island Walmart did the right thing in 2017 when it accommodated an employee with hearing, speech and cognitive impairments so she could better understand her work assignments. As a result, the employee was able to perform well, rated as providing “valued performance.”

Yet, in 2020, new Walmart managers discontinued the accommodations, later terminating the employee for insubordination over an ensuing conflict.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Walmart for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act and settled for $60,000. The retailer is also required to train managers and HR personnel on the ADA and reasonable accommodations, submit compliance reports to the EEOC, and post notice of disability rights and the settlement on the bulletin board.

EEOC regional attorney Kimberly Cruz observed: “Federal law prohibits firing an employee because of a disability or the need for a reasonable accommodation. If an employer’s unlawful failure to accommodate a disability leads to an employee’s termination, the firing itself may also be unlawful under the Americans with Disabilities Act.”

Take-Aways:

Unless there is an undue hardship, employers must reasonably accommodate disabled employees to facilitate their job performance. When management changes, employers should ensure the new bosses do not eliminate those accommodations.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Not So Fast: Feds Seek to Slow FedEx Remote Work Elimination for Disabled Employees (March 7, 2025)
• Bathroom Discrimination: EEOC: Walmart Failed to Accommodate Disabled Worker’s Toilet Trips (April 14, 2023)
• Accommodation Nation: Listen: Don’t Turn a Deaf Ear to Employee Disabilities (August 23, 2019)

Helena Kobrin
March 13, 2026

Meal and rest break violations remain a leading source of wage-and-hour litigation in California. Many claims arise from routine practices that employers can correct with proper oversight.

1. Allowing, but Not Providing a Timely Meal Period

Employers must provide a first meal period of at least 30 minutes no later than the end of the fifth hour of work, and a second when an employee works more than ten hours.

"Available" is not enough. Employers must relieve employees of all duty, relinquish control over their activities, and permit a reasonable opportunity to take an uninterrupted 30-minute break without impeding or discouraging them from doing so. A clear, California-compliant written policy communicated to employees and supervisors is central to meeting that standard.

That said, employers need not police breaks or ensure no work is performed. If an employee voluntarily works through a properly provided break, the employer is generally not in violation, though it must of course pay for all time worked.

Missed break liability arises from vague or missing policies, untrained supervisors, production pressure, or scheduling that pushes breaks past the deadline. Late, interrupted, or on-duty meal periods attributable to management trigger premium pay and potential penalties.

2. Automatically Deducting Meal Periods

Automatic 30-minute deductions create risk if employees skip or shorten breaks. Time records must reflect actual practice.

3. Letting Rest Breaks Slide

Employers must authorize and permit a paid 10-minute rest period for every four hours worked or major fraction thereof.

Supervisors who discourage breaks, fail to provide coverage, or assign workloads that prevent breaks expose the employer to liability, even if no written policy prohibits breaks.

4. Failing to Pay Premiums

If a compliant meal or rest period is not provided, the employer owes one additional hour of so-called premium pay at the employee’s regular rate for each workday a violation occurs.

Premium pay is mandatory. Failure to pay it timely may result in waiting time penalties and wage statement claims.

5. Inconsistent Policies and Spotty Documentation

Inconsistent practices increase litigation and PAGA risk. Common issues include:

• Outdated policies;
• Managers applying different standards across departments;
• No protocol for employees to confirm breaks were taken or to report when supervisor conduct or production demands prevented them; and
• Time records that contradict written policies.

Take-Aways

Employers should update policies; audit time records for late, short, or missed breaks; train supervisors to avoid discouraging breaks; provide a clear reporting process; and pay premiums promptly when owed.

Proactive compliance reduces exposure to class actions and PAGA claims.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Sweat The Details: Friendly Workplace Practices Audits Before PAGA Comes Calling (January 24, 2025)
• Devils or Detail-Precision Timekeeping: Best Protection Against Business Damnation (January 12, 2026)

Cindy Bamforth
March 6, 2026

California Labor Code section 515.6 exempts certain licensed physicians and surgeons from Labor Code 510 overtime compensation upon receipt of specified minimum hourly compensation. That rate changes annually.

California’s Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) announced the January 1, 2026 rate increases for this minimum to $107.17, up from $103.75, reflecting the 3.3% increase in the California Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers.

Employers that pay eligible professionals this minimum hourly rate and accurately track hours worked do not need to pay overtime to those employees.

The physician or surgeon skills and duties criteria in Labor Code section 515.6 must also be met. Principally, the employee must be “primarily engaged” (more than 50% of the time) in duties requiring licensure.

California Business and Professions Code section 2052 specifies such duties, requiring a medical license for anyone who “practices or attempts to practice, or who advertises or holds himself or herself out as practicing, any system or mode of treating the sick or afflicted in this state, or diagnoses, treats, operates for, or prescribes for any ailment, blemish, deformity, disease, disfigurement, disorder, injury, or other physical or mental condition of any person.”

Physicians and surgeons paid on a salary basis will not qualify for this exemption, but may otherwise qualify for the administrative, executive or professional exemptions from overtime. Each category possesses its own distinct requirements.

For more information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Computer Software Overtime Exemption Rates (February 20, 2026)
• Overtime Policy – Burning the Midnight Oil (March 9, 2023)

Helena Kobrin
March 6, 2026

California employers face a growing trend: employees who stop showing up without notice. Handling these ghosting cases without a clear process can create unexpected legal exposure.

What Is Job Abandonment?

Job abandonment occurs when an employee stops showing up and cuts off contact with his or her employer. While most employers treat this as a voluntary resignation, moving too quickly or without documentation -- especially in California -- can turn an assumed quit into a contested termination.

The Legal Risk:

An employee may later claim a medical emergency, mental health crisis, or family situation, arguing wrongful termination instead of resignation. This can also trigger claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) or California Family Rights Act (CFRA), which provide job-protected leave.

What Employers Should Do:

When an employee stops communicating:

• Contact the employee by phone, text, and email and document each attempt in detail;
• Reach out to the listed emergency contact if the employee remains unreachable after a reasonable period;
• Apply the written policy consistently -- for example, if the handbook defines abandonment as three consecutive no-call/no-show days, apply that standard every time; and
• Once that consecutive days limit has passed, send a formal written notice to the employee's address of record, stating that his/her position will be considered abandoned if there is no response by a specific date.

Take-Aways:

Employee ghosting may be informal, but employers must respond with structure and documentation. A clear written policy should set expectations and define the abandonment timeframe. Prompt action, consistent policy enforcement, and thorough records best defend against future claims.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Leave Law Lowdown - California Vacation, PTO and Sick Leave (July 17, 2025)
• Disability Leave Policy – August 25, 2023

Cindy Bamforth
February 26, 2026

California Labor Code section 515.5 exempts certain computer software professionals from overtime compensation if paid specified minimum compensation.

California’s Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) announced a 3.3% rate increase for 2026, from $56.97 to $58.85, stemming from the California Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers. Alternatively, an otherwise qualified salaried employee is eligible on minimum annual compensation of $122,573.13, up from $118,657.43, payable at least once monthly at no less than $10,214.44.

An exempt computer professional must also meet each of the Labor Code section 515.5 high-level skills and duties criteria. Among these, the employee must be “primarily engaged” (more than 50% of the time) in intellectual or creative work requiring the exercise of discretion and independent judgment such as:

• applying systems analysis to determine “functional specifications” of hardware, software or systems
• designing computer systems or programs; and/or
• documenting, testing, creating or modifying computer programs related to computer systems software or hardware design

This exemption does not apply to trainees, entry-level employees, writers in the computer field, or others who use computers extensively but are not doing systems analysis, programming, and the like.

Although computer software professionals need not be paid overtime premium under California law, employers should further ensure they meet the comparable federal law exemption, which includes a less restrictive definition of “primary” duty, a lower hourly/salaried threshold, and similar skills and duties tests.

Such computer professionals may also qualify for the administrative, executive or “learned profession” exemptions from overtime, each of which has its own distinct qualifications.

For more information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• The Basics of Overtime: Five Rules for California (April 27, 2018)

Helena Kobrin
February 20, 2026

Government Code 12999 requires private employers of 100 or more direct or labor contractor hires to submit an annual pay data report to the Civil Rights Department (CRD). See California’s Annual Occupation Census: Two Steps Will Expand Employee Data Reporting Law (November 14, 2025) for details.

The CRD website has numerous tools available to help employers comply, including:

• A pay data (registration) portal;
• Handbook for reporting requirements and resources;
• User guide with examples;
• Excel templates with samples; and
• Statewide annual results, 2020-2023.

Take-Aways:

Required pay data reporters should use the CRD website and get a timely start to ensure compliance by the May 13 deadline.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• What's New in 2026: California's Annual Occupation Census (November 14, 2025)
• Equal Pay Reporting: Substantial Penalties for Ignoring the May 14, 2025 Deadline (April 17, 2025)
• Old Trends Die Hard: 2023 Equal Pay Results: Disparities Not Disappearing (April 11, 2025)

Helena Kobrin
February 13, 2026

The Internal Revenue Service has announced the 2026 optional standard mileage reimbursement rate for employee business use of a personal vehicle, effective January 1, 2026. The rate increases 2.5 cents, from 70 to 72.5 cents/mile.

These rates apply to fully electric, hybrid, gasoline, and diesel-powered vehicles.

These standard business mileage rates stem from annual government studies of fixed and variable vehicle operating costs, including insurance, repairs, maintenance, fuel, oil, and depreciation.

Under California Labor Code section 2802, employers must reimburse employees for all actual work-related expenses necessarily incurred in the course of their job duties. While the statute does not set a specific mileage rate, many employers rely on the IRS standard mileage rate as a reasonable method of reimbursement.

Take-Aways:

Employers that use the IRS standard mileage rate should reimburse employees for work-related use of personal vehicles at 72.5 cents per mile beginning January 1, 2026.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Out-Of-Pocket Procedure – Business Expense Reimbursement Policy (December 2, 2022)

Cindy Bamforth
February 11, 2026

1960s America will long be remembered for widespread protests against racial discrimination and the Vietnam War, the “make love, not war” generation, and the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Federal discrimination bans began with the 13th, 14th, and 15th constitutional amendments (1865- 1870), outlawing slavery and granting full citizenship rights (“equal protection”) to all Americans. However, the Southern states soon circumvented these promised principles by Jim Crow laws, implementing special taxes, literacy tests and other measures to bar African-Americans from voting and exercising other rights. Some states enforced and condoned segregation through violent vigilante groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.

Founded in the 1930s, the American civil rights movement gained its first real foothold in 1954 with Brown v. Board of Education, U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that racial segregation in public schools (the so-called “separate but equal” doctrine) was unconstitutional. Southern states defied the decision by continuing to impose measures that effectively perpetuated segregation, adding fuel to the calls for equal rights and opportunity.

In the 1963 Birmingham, Alabama demonstrations, police employed dogs, clubs and high-pressure fire hoses to suppress nonviolent protesters, including children.

Those brutalities, broadcasted to national TV audiences, led President John Kennedy to propose the Civil Rights Act, signed into law, remarkably, by his successor, Southern Democrat Lyndon Johnson.

The Act remains the country’s principal anti-discrimination law, prohibiting public place segregation and banning employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. It also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, authorized to sue employers on behalf of workers with discrimination claims.

California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act is this state’s counterpart, enforced by the state’s Civil Rights Department.

All such laws confirm employers should judge people for their competence on the job and not by race, religion and the many other characteristics (“protected classifications”) deemed arbitrary and irrelevant to workplace qualification.

Tim Bowles
February 6, 2026

A quiet pandemic is plaguing California employers: the mounting wave of class actions and Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims over underpaid wages, overtime, meal and rest periods and more. The cost in defense and in settlement can be devastating.

In class actions, a current or former employee seeks appointment as representative of all current and former employees with common claims. Fellow workers need not be aware of the issues or want to be involved.

In PAGA claims, a current or ex-employee brings the suit to collect Labor Code penalties for himself and all workers, the state receiving 65% of any recovery, the employees 35%, plus attorney fees. Penalties can be $50 or $100 for the first offense and skyrocket to double for subsequent offenses for every pay period in which they occurred. The employee must notify the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) of the supposed PAGA claims at least 65 days before filing in court.

California employers are being clobbered. Workplace class actions filings jumped from 3,472 in 2020 to 5,117 in 2023, a 47% increase. See Ogletree Deakins article. PAGA claims started out slowly in their first year – 11 in 2006 – but by 2023, they were at 7,780. Duane Morris article. Defending class action and PAGA matters now dominate our practice’s time and attention.

Compliance reviews before the lawyers come knocking is vital. No internal review will guarantee never being sued but the benefit in limiting the chances is immense. Other “ounces of prevention” include:

• Attending our annual employment law webinar, final session scheduled February 27; and
• Maintaining a comprehensive policy handbook and forms, updated annually.

Take-Aways:

Employers should take all steps to proof themselves against such potentially business-ending claims. Working with a management-side employment attorney and taking advantage of available resources is a must for all businesses.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.
See also:

• Find Out What’s New in 2026 -- Go For The Win (January 22, 2026)
• Don’t Miss the Boat – Workplace Handbook and Forms 2026 (January 2, 2026)
• Sweat The Details: Friendly Workplace Practices Audits Before PAGA Comes Calling (January 24, 2025)

Helena Kobrin
January 30, 2026